Thursday, August 25, 2016

My Somber Concerns One Of Which Is Verified In Strassel's New Book. Soros Hides Behind His Ill Gotten Wealth. Hillary's Health. Hamas and Abbas.

                                                                                                               (See 5 below.)

Similarities?   …

Granted many of my memos are very somber.  Is it because I am old and nearing the end? Is it because I was born to a different generation and I cannot relate to the current?  Is it because I am actually correct in much of what I think and see and feared would happen or am I over reacting?  I have been proven essentially right about predicting far too many trends so do the odds favor my many expressed current concerns?

Among them have been the following::

I always feared the negative impact of unions after they served their initial purpose.  I have been correct about the oppressive growth in government, the growth in unrestrained deficits and their impact on our freedoms.  I have railed against the decline in meaningful curriculum's . I feared the effect of a dependent society, the expanded use of illegal drugs and overuse of legitimate drugs. I have always been concerned about government intrusions in the market place and the failure of government to enforce laws against those who violated the trust and faith capitalism afforded free enterprisers. I have always been suspicious of demagogues who played upon the ignorance of the unwashed.  I am concerned about the fragility of our Republic and the fact that its survival rests upon a strong family unit, a belief in our nation's connection to God, and an informed and participating citizenry all of which are in decline and fading in importance

I just received an inscribed copy of Kim Strassel's: "The Intimidation Game. " As you know Kim will be here in Savannah on Nov 1 and then I am taking her to Atlanta on Nov 2.  She will be discussing and autographing her new book which is about how The Left is silencing free speech.  I have just started reading it and Kim cites case after case in support of her chilling thesis.  Tragically she verifies one of my fears and I have only read 41 pages of her  378 page book.

Finally, I have always embraced the idea that placing political adherence to parties and the desire to be re-elected over the concerns of what was best for the  nation could prove America's death knell. Have we reached that point? Is  Rev. Graham correct? (See 3a below.)

Erick Erickson comes around after Trump appears to modify his immigration position.

I hope  it demonstrates how a businessman can correct his thinking because he would rather be right than go down with the ship due to pride and fear of rejection by voters.

Let the press play the flip flop game .  I contrast Trump's behaviour with Obama's, whose stubbornness and narcissism, in the face of reality, has harmed our nation and caused much tragedy in the world.

We now learn, Obama withdrew enforcing his red line threat in Syria because the leader of Iran said he would withdraw from participating in The Iran Deal. Consequently, hundreds of thousands of Syrians were gassed, killed, had to flee their land.  This act of amoral courage from the Nobel Peace recipient.  (See 1 below.)
Sent by a dear friend and fellow memo reader who wrote three Amens.

I share the writer's views except for his accusation that Republicans have done nothing. There is much truth in his comment but even had they tried they did not have the votes to override Obama's veto and that must be considered. That said, it is fair to ask why did they not at least try and put the ball in Obama's court? (See 2 below.)

George Soros hides behind his money, much of which he made by destroying European currencies.  (See 3 below.)
Why are we always slow to awake to the threats meant to destroy our societies?
 (See 4 below.)
Victor Hanson is always insightful (See 6 below.)
Finally my friend Khaled Toameh writes about Abbas and the threat Hamas poses to him. (See 7 below.)

Honest Praise for Donald Trump. He Has Seen the Light on Immigration Reform.

Donald Trump is doing the right thing. It is the thing Americans across the political spectrum support and instead of bashing him, we should be thanking him for seeing the light. His immigration position now mirrors that of Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio.
According to Donald Trump, who appeared on Sean Hannity’s TV show last night, his immigration policy will be to focus on existing law and deport criminals, but not deport illegal aliens who crossed into the country decades ago and now have families here. Like Trump, I agree that they should not get citizenship. But like Trump, I also agree the GOP, which is the party of families, should not be in the business of separating families.
A grandparent who, to improve their lot in life, crossed the border as a young person in the 70’s, 80’s, or 90’s and now is a productive member of our society should be welcomed into the American dream. Their penalty can be never obtaining citizenship. But do not send them home. Do not break up those families. It is unreasonably cruel to do that, especially when so many have been such hard working people contributing to the betterment of our own society.
These are not people living on the system, but contributing to the system. Send home the people who have broken the law since they arrived. Send home the gang bangers, the murderers, the thieves, and people like that. But parents and grandparents who have poured sweat equity into the American dream should stay.
I am glad Donald Trump has seen the light on this. He should be commended and we should show him some grace for arriving at this decision.
Yes, I agree with him. We need to build a wall and it should be a real, physical wall.
And now I find myself agreeing with him on this too. I can only imagine that my friend Kellyanne Conway is explaining to Donald Trump what her polling and the polling of so many others has shown. Americans are not heartless and do not want to break up the families of decent people.
If Trump were to pull off a miracle and get elected, at least on this we can be reassured he has returned to the position he held up until the day he declared for the Presidency. Perhaps there is some consistency in him after all.
2)AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!!!!!!!!!Jake

 From the time I was able to vote I voted Republican. I am now 72 years old.
Recently I received a questionnaire and request for money from the Republican Party and strongly agree with every question, as I have since Obama was elected.

Unfortunately the one question that was missing is: What have the  Republicans done for the American people?

We gave you a majority in the House and Senate, and you never listened to us. Now you want our money, my money, more money. You should be more concerned about our votes, not our money.

You are the establishment which means all you want is to save your jobs and line your pockets.

Well guess what? It's not going to happen.

TRUMP hasn't asked for a dime.
You might think we are fools because you feel Trump is on a self-destruct course, but look beyond Washington and listen to the masses. Nobody has achieved what he has, especially in the state of New York.

Here's why I want Trump. Yes, he's a bit of an ass; yes, he's an  egomaniac; but I don't care.
      The country is a mess because politicians suck.
      The Republican Party is two-faced and gutless, and illegal's are everywhere.
      I want it fixed!
      I don't care that Trump is crude.
      I don't care that he insults people.
      I don't care that he has changed positions.
      I don't care that he's been married 3 time.
      I don't care that he fights with Megan Kelly and Rosie O’Donnell.
      I don't care that he doesn't know the name of some Muslin terrorist.

Our country has become weak, bankrupt. Our enemies make fun of us. We are being invaded by illegal's. We are becoming a nation of victims where every Tom, Ricardo and Hassid is a special group with special rights to a point where we don't even recognize the country in which we were born and raised, "AND I JUST WANT IT FIXED." And Trump is the only guy who seems to understand what the people want.

I'm sick of politicians, sick of the Democratic Party, sick of the  Republican Party, and sick of illegal's. I just want this fixed.  Trump may not be a saint, but he doesn't have lobbyist money controlling him; he doesn't have political correctness restraining him; all you know is that he has been very successful; a good negotiator; he has built a lot of things; and, he's also not a politician. And, he says he'll fix it. And, I believe him because he is too much of an egoist to be proven wrong or looked at and called a liar.

I don't care if the guy has bad hair.
Thought for the Day  "No country can sustain, in idleness, more than a small percentage of its numbers. The great majority must labor at something productive!"
 Don R. "Dick" Ivey, PhD

George Soros should put his mouth where his money is

Why doesn’t the billionaire debate his opponents, rather than financing smear campaigns against them?

Washington is not an easy-going town. You come here to argue policy with the big boys you should expect some rough-and-tumble. But you also should expect clean fights -- no biting, no spitting, no hitting below the belt. Whatever else divides us, we all value free speech and edifying debate, right?

Not exactly. Leftwing “activists” -- often posing as journalists – have a habit of targeting and trolling those who deviate from the “politically correct” line.
About five years ago, it became clear that a concerted effort was underway to defame me and the national security policy institute I founded just after the 9/11 attacks, along with other individuals and groups focusing on the toxic ideologies that had been gaining ground in what we now call the Muslim world. The activists’ goal was to brand us as “Islamophobes” -- haters, racists and bigots who should be shunned, drummed out of the public square, made to shut the hell up.

What I didn’t know then was that this smear campaign was being financed by world-famous billionaire and leftist philanthropist George Soros. Recently, a website called DCLeaks purloined and published online more than 2,500 files from Mr. Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF).

Combing through those files, The Daily Caller found and reported on one referring to an OSF document discussing how to discredit critics of radical Islam, as well as scholars and journalists conducting research on Islamism’s historical roots and contemporary expressions, e.g. al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic Republic of Iran. 

Those who run OSF for Mr. Soros were distressed that groups on the left lacked “high quality opposition research” to combat “anti-Muslim xenophobia.” So OSF decided to provide hundreds of thousands of dollars to launch, under the auspices of the Center for American Progress (CAP), a liberal think tank founded by John Podesta (a longtime Bill and Hillary Clinton advisor and currently chairman of her presidential campaign), an “Examining Anti-Muslim Bigotry Project.” Its mission would be to “track” the activities of yours truly, Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes, former State Department official Liz Cheney and others.

According to the leaked memo, a “first step” would be to “engage journalists, researchers, academics, and leaders in the anti-hate movement who are researching and writing on Islamophobia” and to develop “a clearer understanding of what by all indications is a well orchestrated and well financed system by which right-wing think tanks, pundits, and politicians are able to introduce false narratives and flawed research into the media cycle and use their misinformation to manipulate public opinion and thwart progressive counter terrorism policies.”

The memo added: “Just as critically, CAP will approach its work with an appreciation of the connections between the Islamophobia movement and related forms of xenophobia.”

“Progressive counterterrorism policies.” “The anti-hate movement.” “An appreciation.” Don’t you just love it? Investor’s Business Daily observed that Mr. Soros’ practice is to spend “money to delegitimize governments and others with whom he disagrees. It's not about debate, and certainly not ‘open,’ as his groups’ names all suggest. It's political subterfuge in service of a far-left agenda.”
Shockingly but not surprisingly, editors and producers at liberal/progressive media outlets have seen nothing worth reporting in these revelations about how a man of enormous wealth and power uses such methods to shape public opinion and government policy.

Bill O’Reilly did. He invited me on his popular television show last week to discuss Mr. Soros’ calumny campaign as well as the billionaire’s broader agenda, which includes pushing Europe and America to open their borders to many more Middle Eastern migrants without taking serious steps to weed out jihadists, promoting President Obama’s nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran, and investing millions in groups dedicated to attacking Israel, the Middle East’s only “open society” -- one surrounded by a sea of blood, the handiwork of both Sunni and Shi’a Islamists. 

Mr. O’Reilly emphasized the fact that Mr. Soros is a major donor to Democrats, one of them the presidential candidate leading in the polls. Do left-of-center journalists really not grasp the newsworthiness of all this? If it were revealed that the conservative Koch brothers had been writing big checks to slander think tanks on the left as pro-terrorist, surely the mainstream media would see that as a big story. Why the double standard?

This addendum: As far as I’m aware CAP is no longer involved in the defamation business and the individuals who spearheaded the effort five years ago no longer work there. These days, CAP’s experts participate in lively but collegial debates with scholars at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. I would argue that’s how it’s supposed to be, even here in Washington.

Mr. Soros clearly disagrees. His idea of an open society is one in which the people have the right to know only what he wants them to know. If he’d like to publicly debate that or any other topic, my calendar is flexible.

Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and a columnist for the Washington Times.

Time is like a river. You cannot touch the water twice, because the flow that has passed will never pass again. Franklin Graham, the son of Rev Billy Graham... was speaking at the First Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Florida, when he said America will not come back. He wrote:

The American dream ended on November 6th, 2012 in Ohio. The second term of Barack Obama has been the final nail in the coffin for the legacy of the white Christians who discovered, explored, pioneered, settled and developed the greatest republic in the history of mankind.

A coalition of blacks, Latinos, feminists, gays, government workers, union members, environmental extremists, the media, Hollywood, uninformed young people, the "forever needy," the chronically unemployed, illegal aliens and other "fellow travelers" have ended Norman Rockwell's America.

You will never again out-vote these people. It will take individual acts of defiance and massive displays of civil disobedience to get back the rights we have allowed them to take away. It will take zealots, not moderates and shy, not reach-across-the-aisle RINOs ("RINOs" is an acronym for "Republicans in Name Only") to right this ship and restore our beloved country to its former status.

People like me are completely politically irrelevant, and I will probably never again be able to legally comment on or concern myself with the aforementioned coalition which has surrendered our culture, our heritage and our traditions without a shot being fired.

The cocker spaniel is off the front porch, the pit bull is in the back yard. The American Constitution has been replaced with Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" and the likes of Chicago shyster David Axelrod along with international socialist George Soros have been pulling the strings on their beige puppet and have brought us Act 2 of the New World Order.

The curtain will come down but the damage has been done, the story has been told.

Those who come after us will once again have to risk their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to bring back the Republic that this generation has timidly frittered away due to white guilt and political correctness...

Exposing the criminal society and the culture of death

By Isi Leibler

We are losing the battle in the war of ideas for the simple reason that we are continuously on the defensive while those seeking our destruction actively and relentlessly demonize us.

Ever since the Oslo Accords, successive Israeli governments have felt obliged to understate and even dismiss Palestinian terror and hatred in order to maintain domestic public support for policies that, alas with the benefit of hindsight, were doomed to fail. At the very early stages, Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat told his people that the ultimate goal was the end of Jewish sovereignty - and we dismissed such outbursts as empty words merely designed to placate his radical domestic opponents.

But as the government falsely praised our peace partner, many Israelis deluded themselves into believing that the terrorism we faced was an extremist aberration and that the Palestinians were committed to ending the conflict on the basis of a two-state solution. Likewise, most of the world accepted at face value our repeated praise of Arafat and his successor, Mahmoud Abbas, as moderates and genuine peace partners.

This suited the long-term Palestinian policy of destroying us in stages. They readily accepted concessions and withdrawals but without compromising one iota, and they continue to demonize us and challenge our legitimacy.

But the worst aspect was our failure to highlight the poisonous brainwashing the Palestinian Authority had inflicted on its population. While Arab hostility to Jews prevailed even during the Mandatory period, it was not comparable to the culture of death and evil that today saturates every aspect of Palestinian life.

The Palestinians have stated explicitly that their state would be Judenrein and that Jews would never be permitted to live in their ancestral home even if they were willing to accept Palestinian jurisdiction. Indeed, Palestinians were brutally executed when they were deemed to have sold land to a Jew.

The Palestinian Authority has become a criminal society and can be compared to prewar Germany when the Nazis transformed their population into genocidal barbarians by depicting Jews as subhuman. The Palestinians depict Jews as “the offspring of apes and pigs” and call for their extermination. This is not even done subtly but with blatant statements to this effect emanating daily from religious and political leaders and accessible from vast documentary sources compiled by Palestinian Media Watch, MEMRI and others.
A society in which children from kindergarten are brainwashed into believing that the highest goal in Islam is to achieve martyrdom in the course of killing Jews can only be described as criminal.

The demonization of Israel and manifestations of the culture of death are promoted without inhibition by the leadership, the mullahs in the mosques and the state-controlled media. They amount to direct incitement for individuals to strike out and kill Jews in concert or randomly. The “heroic” scenes of youngsters stabbing Jews, the praise by Abbas himself of martyrs “with holy blood” and the totally contrived religious frenzy accusing Israelis of planning to destroy Al-Aqsa mosque, coalesce into a witch’s brew of primeval rage and hatred.

The PA provides generous state salaries to terrorists apprehended by Israelis, and if they are killed, their families are remunerated — from funds provided by Western countries. Religious and political leadership at all levels sanctifies terrorists as heroes and national martyrs. City squares, schools and even football clubs are named in their honor.

The barbarism imbibed by the Palestinians is reflected in the street celebrations that erupt spontaneously with every murder of an Israeli. Even more nauseating are the repeated displays on TV of mothers expressing pride that one of their children had become a martyr and usually expressing hope that her other children would follow the example.

Under these circumstances, it is no wonder that Palestinian opinion polls reflect public support for terror attacks against Israel and opposition to a two-state solution. The Arafat/Abbas indoctrination process has radicalized successive generations into believing that the only solution to the conflict is the permanent termination of Jewish sovereignty in the area.

There is irrefutable evidence of the barbaric and genocidal nature of Palestinian society. Indeed, the reality is that, despite maintaining a “moderate” stance to the outside world, internally the Palestinians and ISIS are birds of a feather — although the Palestinians are probably more corrupt.

Alongside the turbulence in the region and the threat from Iran and ISIS, could one envisage any country agreeing to accept statehood for what will inevitably be a neighboring criminal state pledged to its destruction or a candidate for an ISIS or Iranian takeover? This would be utterly inconceivable.

Yet most of the international community, including the United States, regards this as an issue of two nations arguing over real estate. Were that the case, the Palestinians would not have dismissed the offers by Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, who were willing to concede up to 97% of the territories formerly controlled by the Jordanians.

Israel has been the target of repeated defamation and delegitimization yet has basically only been on the defensive, seeking to refute the lies being disseminated. But as Joseph Goebbels said, if one repeats a lie continuously, people begin believing it. This dictum has now been realized; many in the Western world have absorbed the distorted Palestinian narrative of Israel being an apartheid state, an occupier and a nation born in sin.

Ironically, the weakness of our position lies in the fact that, until recently, in order to appease our allies and “protect” Israelis from being confronted with the stark reality, we deliberately held back from telling the truth and failed to highlight the barbaric and criminal nature of our purported peace partner.

Had we mounted campaigns at the outset, exposing the horrors perpetrated by our neighbors, it may not have influenced anti-Semites and the delusional Left but it would have made a significant impact on the open-minded.

But even now, belatedly exposing the barbarity of our neighbors should be made the top priority in our foreign relations efforts rather than the endless disputes over whether the miniscule 2% of territory comprising settlements (which are not being expanded) is justified.
The recent initiative by Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman to establish relations with independent Palestinians, aside from not having cabinet approval, is bound to fail because any Palestinian engaged in such negotiations would immediately be assassinated. Pressure must be exerted to encourage rank-and-file Palestinians that their best interests will be served when they appoint leaders who genuinely support the peace process. Alas, for the time being, that is not even on the horizon.

Today, we must move forward and promote a focused effort with detailed documented exposure of the evil nature of Palestinian society, which will make it far more difficult and embarrassing for the Americans and Europeans to continue pressuring Israel to accept the creation of what will invariably be a criminal state — particularly in the context of the mayhem prevailing in the region and the terrorist threats now impacting the heartland of Europe.
5)  Hillary's Coughing and the Debates

Hillary's flacks maintain that she has no serious health problems, but there is an increasingly public amount of evidence that they are lying.  Her coughing fits, for example, have gone on for minutes during interviews and speeches and debates.  The leftist establishment media has totally ignored this running story, but there is one venue in which her uncontrollable coughing and hacking cannot be hidden from the American people: the presidential debates.

Because her health seems to getting worse all the time and because she has never appeared in a nationally televised presidential debate (indeed, even her few debates with Bernie Sanders were scheduled to avoid large audiences) the stress of standing before 100 million or so Americans watching her live should make the chances of her descending into minutes of coughing, gagging, and hacking while the world watches very real.

What happens then?  Well, consider if she keeps coughing for two or three minutes, as she has several times.  It will interrupt whatever point she has been trying to make and focus instead on her inability to speak.  A debater affects audiences as much by his demeanor and voice as by what he actually says.

Images matter, as the haggard-looking Nixon proved in the 1960 presidential debates.  He looked tired.  He looked old.  He had five o'clock shadow.  Those who heard Nixon and Kennedy on the radio actually thought Nixon won the debate, but those who watched them on television thought Kennedy won.

The sound and sight of an old, fat, sick coughing woman beside a healthy and vigorous man speaking confidently and clearly can only hurt Hillary and help Trump.  Whether this is "fair" or not we can leave to leftists obsessed with "fairness," but most Americans, who want a strong and robust leader, eschew these silly notions.
Hillary's uncontrolled coughing will be the story coming out of the debate, no matter what the candidates actually said, and that will make her health an issue that may not go away until Election Day.  If voters go into the ballot booth really wondering if she is healthy enough to be president, that negates all the arguments her campaign is making that Trump is temperamentally unsuited to be president. 

The greater danger for her is if the coughing jags show up in the first debate, then reappear in the second debate and the last debate.  If Hillary starts coughing in the first debate, then she will be quite conscious of that problem in the second debate, which will actually make it more likely that anxiety will bring on another attack.  If she has an uncontrollable coughing fit in the second or third debate, that may well be the biggest story of the campaign – except, of course, for another story.

If Hillary clearly appears to have serious health problems, then that means she and her staffers have been lying through their teeth to the American people.  That is not news, but this would be the sort of lie that everyone can see with his own eyes and can understand with no help.  Moreover, denying that she is really sick will compound the lying because ordinary Americans will think she is treating them like idiots.

So what could she do?  Hillary could say that she really is sick and was hiding the extent of her problems but is still fit to be president.  There are two problems with that.  First, Clintons thrive by lying with a straight face and never coming clean.  Admitting that she had been lying about that would grant new focus on all the other lies Hillary has told us.  Second, who will believe that she really is healthy enough to be president, no matter what she says? 

There is only one way this could fail to shift enough votes to win the White House for Trump.  If Hillary starts coughing and it is clear that this is going on for a few minutes, Donald Trump needs to say nothing at all in words or body language except, perhaps, to ask sympathetically if she needs help or would like a short break. 
Even the next day, the Trump campaign ought to say nothing more than "we hope Mrs. Clinton is doing better today, and we hope that she is able to well for the next debate."  Nothing snide, nothing editorial, and nothing more.

Diversity: History's pathway to chaos

Victor Davis Hanson

By Victor Davis Hanson

The Roman Empire worked as long as Iberians, Greeks, Jews, Gauls and myriad other African, Asian and European communities spoke Latin, cherished habeas corpus and saw being Roman as preferable to identifying with their own particular tribe. By the fifth century, diversity had won out but would soon prove a fatal liability.

Rome disintegrated when it became unable to assimilate new influxes of northern European tribes. Newcomers had no intention of giving up their Gothic, Hunnish or Vandal identities.

The propaganda of history's multicultural empires -- the Ottoman, the Russian, the Austro-Hungarian, the British and the Soviet -- was never the strength of their diversity. To avoid chaos, their governments bragged about the religious, ideological or royal advantages of unity, not diversity.

Nor did more modern quagmires like IraqLebanonSyriaRwanda or Yugoslavia boast that they were "diverse." Instead, their strongman leaders naturally claimed that they shared an all-encompassing commonality.

When such coerced harmony failed, these nations suffered the even worse consequences of diversity, as tribes and sects turned murderously upon each other.

For some reason, contemporary America believes that it can reject its uniquely successful melting pot to embrace a historically dangerous and discredited salad-bowl separatism.

Is there any evidence from the past that institutionalizing sects and ethnic grievances would ensure a nation's security, prosperity and freedom?

America's melting pot is history's sole exception of E pluribus unum inclusivity: a successful multiracial society bound by a common culture, language and values. But this is a historic aberration with a future that is now in doubt.

Some students attending California's Claremont College openly demand roommates of the same race. Racially segregated "safe spaces" are fixtures on college campuses.

We speak casually of bloc voting on the basis of skin color -- as if a lockstep Asian, Latino, black or white vote is a good thing.
We are reverting to the nihilism of the old Confederacy. The South's "one-drop rule" has often been copied to assure employers or universities that one qualifies as a minority.

Some public figures have sought to play up or invent diversity advantages. Sometimes, as in the cases of Elizabeth WarrenRachel Dolezal and Ward Churchill, the result is farce.

Given our racial fixations, we may soon have to undergo computer scans of our skin colors to rank competing claims of grievance.

How does one mete out the relative reparations for various atrocities of the past, such as slavery, the Holocaust, the American Indian wars, the Asian or Catholic exclusion laws, indentured servitude, or the mid-18th-century belief that the Irish were not quite human?

Sanctuary cities, in the manner of 1850s Richmond or Charleston invoking nullification, now openly declare themselves immune from federal law. Does that defiance ensure every city the right to ignore whatever federal laws it finds inconvenient, from the filing of 1040s to voting laws?

The diversity industry hinges on U.S. citizens still envisioning a shrinking white population as the "majority." Yet "white" is now not always easily definable, given intermarriage and constructed identities.

In California, those who check "white" on Orwellian racial boxes are now a minority. Will white Californians soon nightmarishly declare themselves aggrieved minorities and thus demand affirmative action, encourage Viking-like names such as Ragnar or Odin, insert umlauts and diereses into their names to hype their European bona fides, seek segregated European-American dorms and set up "Caucasian Studies" programs at universities?

Women now graduate from college at a higher rate than men. Will there be a male effort to ensure affirmative action for college admissions and graduation rates?

If the white vote reaches 70 percent for a particular candidate, is that really such a good thing, as it was considered to be when President Obama was praised for capturing 95 percent of the black vote?
It is time to step back from the apartheid brink.

Even onetime diversity advocate Oprah Winfrey has had second thoughts about the lack of commonality in America. She recently vowed to quit using the word "diversity" and now prefers "inclusion."

  • Hamas's dream of extending its control to the West Bank now seems more realistic than ever -- unless Mahmoud Abbas wakes up and realizes that he made a big mistake by authorizing local and municipal elections.

  • The blood pouring out in Nablus and other Palestinian towns is proof that Abbas is on his way to losing control over the West Bank, just as he lost Gaza to Hamas in 2007. In an emergency meeting held on August 25 in Nablus, several Palestinian factions and figures reached agreement that it would be impossible to hold the vote under the current circumstances.
Hours after his security officers lynched a detainee, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas urged Palestinian businessmen living abroad to support the Palestinian economy by investing in the Palestinian territories. The Palestinian Authority (PA), he asserted, was "working to provide security and safety to encourage investment."

According to Abbas, "The Palestinian territories are living in a state of security stability, which we are working to provide for residents and investors alike by enforcing the rule of law and enhancing transparency and accountability."

It must be nice to create your own reality, especially if your true reality is that of the 81-year-old Abbas.
In his speech before the businessmen, Abbas neglected any reference to the latest wave of "security chaos" in PA-controlled areas in the West Bank, specifically Nablus, the largest Palestinian city.

Five Palestinians, including two PA police officers, were killed in the worst scenes of internecine violence to hit the West Bank in recent years. Abbas was either playing the businessmen for fools or hoping that they share his deaf and blind state.

The violence in Nablus did not come as a surprise to those who have been monitoring the situation in the West Bank in recent months.

In fact, scenes of lawlessness and "security chaos" have become part of the norm in many Palestinian cities, villages and refugee camps -- a sign that the PA may be losing control to armed gangs and militias. Palestinians refer to the situation as falatan amni, or "security chaos." An article published in Gatestone in June referred to the growing instances of anarchy and lawlessness in PA-controlled areas in the West Bank, first and foremost Nablus.

Palestinians refer to Nablus as the "Mountain of Fire" -- a reference to the countless armed attacks carried out against Israelis by residents of the city since 1967. Current events in Nablus, however, have shown how easily fire burns the arsonist. The Palestinian Authority is now paying the price for harboring, funding and inciting gang members and militiamen who until recently were hailed by many Palestinians as "heroes" and "resistance fighters." Unsurprisingly, most of these "outlaws" and "criminals" (as the PA describes them) are affiliated in one way or another with Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction.
Nablus, the so-called Mountain of Fire, is now threatening to turn into a volcano that is set to erupt in the face of Abbas and his PA government.

The situation in Nablus the past few days raises serious questions about the ability of the PA to perform basic security measures and rein in armed gangs and militiamen. Moreover, the unprecedented violence has further shattered Palestinian confidence in the PA and its leaders ahead of the local and municipal elections, scheduled to take place on October 8.

Hamas's dream of extending its control to the West Bank now seems more realistic than ever. Under the current circumstances, Abbas would be offering the West Bank to Hamas on a silver platter -- unless he wakes up and realizes that he made a big mistake by authorizing the local and municipal elections.
And the businessmen who met with Abbas? One might guess that they are sophisticated enough to avoid a doomed investment. Nablus will no doubt do the trick: they are likely to go running from the mayhem of the PA-controlled territories.

Things lately began to unravel when on August 18, in the Old City of Nablus, two Palestinian Authority security officers, Shibli bani Shamsiyeh and Mahmoud Taraira, were killed in an armed clash with gunmen.

Hours later, PA policemen shot dead two Palestinian gunmen who were allegedly involved in the killing of the officers. The two were identified as Khaled Al-Aghbar and Ali Halawah. The families of the two men accused the PA of carrying out an "extrajudicial" killing, and claimed their sons were captured alive and only afterwards shot dead. The families called for an independent commission of inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the killing of their sons. Palestinian human rights organizations have also joined the call for an inquiry into the killings.

On August 18, two Palestinian Authority policemen were killed in an armed clash with gunmen in Nablus (left). In April of this year, a fierce gun battle erupted between Palestinian Authority policemen and members of the Jaradat clan in the refugee camp of Jenin (right). The clash started during an attempt to arrest a clan member.

In June, two other PA security officers, Anan Al-Tabouk and Uday Al-Saifi, were also killed in a shootout with gunmen in Nablus. The PA claimed that "outlaws" were behind the killings and vowed to punish the culprits.

Tensions in Nablus reached their peak on August 23, when scores of PA policemen lynched Ahmed Halawah, a former policeman suspected of leading a notorious gang belonging to Abbas's Fatah faction. Halawah was beaten to death by PA policemen shortly after he was arrested and taken to the PA-run Jneid Prison in Nablus.

The PA leadership, which has since admitted that Halawah was lynched by its policemen, says it has ordered an inquiry into the case. Its leaders have described the lynching as an "unacceptable mistake."
The lynching of the detainee sparked widespread protests throughout the West Bank, with many Palestinians calling for an immediate inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the case and demanding that those responsible be brought to trial.

The Palestinian Bar Association issued a statement strongly condemning the lynching of Halawah as a "crime and a human rights violation." The Association called for holding those responsible, adding, "The regrettable and painful events, including the crime of killing Ahmed Halawah, do not serve the interest of the citizen or homeland and deepens divisions in our society." It also called on the PA and its security forces to abide by the law and honor the human rights of the Palestinians and their public freedoms.

Alarmed by the widespread condemnations of the lynching of Halawah, some Palestinian Authority officials began issuing direct and veiled threats against Palestinian critics.

Palestinian lawyer Wael Al-Hazam, who called on Abbas to "withdraw" his security forces from Nablus, was visited by unidentified gunmen who sprayed his house with 14 bullets. The attorney and his family members were not hurt in the shooting attack, which was clearly designed to send a warning message to anyone who dared to raise his or her voice against human rights abuses by the PA security forces. And in this instance, the message arrived.

Shortly after the attack on his house, the lawyer issued a statement in which he said, "14 bullets are enough to silence me. I'm a man of the law and I cannot face bullets. My pen and voice are the only weapon I have. I do not possess armed militias to defend myself." The attack on his house came shortly after PA security officers threatened the lawyer, warning him against appearing on a TV show to discuss the latest wave of violence in his city.

The turmoil in Nablus has prompted many Palestinians to call on Abbas to make a decision to postpone the upcoming municipal election in their city. In an emergency meeting held on August 25 in Nablus, several Palestinian factions and figures reached agreement that it would be impossible to hold the vote under the current circumstances.

Sarhan Dweikat, a senior member of Abbas's Fatah, said that an election delay was needed, to
"protect the social fabric and preserve our national project, which is facing an existential threat in light of the security chaos and anarchy in Nablus. ... Conditions in Nablus do not provide a positive climate for holding elections."
It is hard to see how Abbas, delusional as he appears to be, would heed the calls to postpone the local and municipal elections. His pathetic attempt to persuade Palestinian businessmen to invest their money in PA-controlled areas at a time when the flames are engulfing his backyard is yet another sign of the man's refusal -- or inability -- to see the reality on the ground.

This is the same president who claims that he is seeking to lead his people toward statehood and a better future. Incredibly, Abbas can probably continue to fool world leaders into believing that he and the Palestinian Authority are prepared for statehood. Yet the blood pouring out in Nablus and other Palestinian cities and villages is proof positive that Abbas is on his way to losing control over the West Bank, just as he lost the Gaza Strip to Hamas in 2007. If until now it seemed that Hamas posed the biggest threat to Abbas's rule over the West Bank, it is now obvious that that is not so. The real threat, as brought home in blood in the West Bank, is coming from Abbas's homegrown loyalists-turned-rebels.
Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist, is based on Jerusalem.

No comments: